Dhand 00FM:SUNY

Chapter One

Religion in the Mahbhrata

brief overview of the historical context of the Mahbhrata might be appropriate to launch ourselves into the discussion of religion in Athe Great Epic.

Historical Context of the Mahbhrata

In his work Brhmanas in Ancient India (1979), Govind Prasad Upadhyay offers a sketch of the historical and social clime that is encompassed in the Mahbhrata. I employ it here because it very economically provides the context for the literary preoccupations of the text. While scholars will differ on individual points of Upadhyay’s interpretation, most will agree on the broad details. In Upadhyay’s assessment, the Mahbhrata is a chronicle of the challenges faced by the Brahmanical community1 between the period of 600 B.C.E. and 400 C.E. He paints a graphic picture of a group besieged by overwhelming varieties of economic, political, and social change. Upadhyay begins by noting the geographical core of the Brahmanical community—an area known as madhyadea, “the middle country,” “heartland”; or ryavarta, “the land of the ryas.” This central space is devoted to the ritualistic sacrificial religion developed by the Indo-Aryans. Upadhyay asserts that the most basic factor contributing to the fluctuations in Brahman- ical fortunes is the economic changes “which took a vigorous course from Mauryan times onwards” (30). Urbanism, mobility, trade, commerce, agricul- ture, the formation of guilds and artisans’ communities all led to a greater degree of movement in society. More wealth and power was placed in the hands of the lower castes of society, promoting hierarchies based on class over those of varna. These new “economic ethics” provided common folk in urban society with a greater scope of options2 (30).

In addition to the economic changes eroding the foundations of Vedic society, Brahmanical tradition was stressed under a variety of social and political developments. The first of these momentous events was the political ascension of Mahpadmnanda in the Vedic madhyadea itself (c. 364 B.C.E.; 30). Mahpadmnanda was the first dra ruler of ryavarta. His accession to rulership represented a mighty blow to the varna-based triumphalism of the Brahmanical tradition, which reserved this privilege only for its protégés, the ksatriyas. That dras should exercise hegemony over dvijas was seen as a sign of the moral decline of society. Upadhyay notes that as a result of this, the Nandas are uniformly vilified in Purnic accounts as usurpers and uncul- tured barbarians. The Nandas were overthrown by Candragupta Maurya who, with the collusion of the Greeks, established the Mauryan dynasty (324–187 B.C.E.).3 The Mauryan rulers, however, became patrons of the heterodox Buddhist tradition, which posed a serious challenge to the Brahmanical tradition. The incursions of the Greeks, moreover, inspired terror and distress. The Yuga Purna, for example, describes the state of panic created by Yvana (Greek) inroads into ryavarta, saying that they brought the havoc of war with them (28). True political chaos, however, came with the collapse of the Mauryan empire after the death of Aoka.4 The northwest frontier of madhyadea saw a series of foreign incursions. The migration of new tribes such as the Madrakas, the Sindhus, and the Sauviras, generated increasing social upheaval. In addition, the repeated invasions of the Greeks, the Scythians, the Parthians, and the Abhiras, led to immense instability and an impending sense of chaos. In Upad- hyay’s assessment, Brahmanical orthodoxy was deeply strained by these invasions, which brought with them not only terrible violence, but also large foreign populations who could have no loyalties to Vedic religion, with its highly specialized ritualism and exclusivist bent. Many of the foreigners, moreover, embraced heterodox traditions, adding further to the insecurity of the orthodox. The Kunas, for example, became patrons of Buddhism. Beginning about the sixth century B.C.E., serious social changes were also afoot. On the eastern fringes of this heartland evolved the ramana movements, both Brahmanical and heterodox, with their yogic and ascetic ideals. Their moral idealism and reformulated soteriological goals represented a severe critique of Vedic religion, a critique that became increasingly influential within the madhyadea itself. The dissonance arising from this is reflected in the cultural tensions between the orthodox tradition of the madhyadea and the heterodox Magadha kingdom, which allied itself with the ramana-based Buddhist movement (24). The Brahmanical tradition thus saw

©2008 State University of New York Press, Albany Religion in the Mahbhrata 23 itself menaced on both sides, besieged by ideological challenges on the one hand, and increasing economic, political, and social change on the other. According to Upadhyay, the southwestern fringe of the madhyadea saw developments of a less strident, but equally significant kind. These were the rise of various devotional movements (31). There was the rise of Bhga- vatism among the Stvata, Vrsni, and Andhaka chapters of the Ydava clan. Like Jainism and Buddhism, Bhgavatism also originated in the tribal republics of ksatriyas (the Vrsni-Andhaka tribes), and spread beyond these areas after the demise of Aoka. Bhgavata religion practised a non-Vedic style of religion, focused around the devotional worship of Vsudeva-Krsna. Upadhyay traces worship of “Stvata heroes” such as Krsna back to the Upanisads, and asserts that by the time of Pnini, Vsudeva was a definite recipient of worship (32). In Bhgavata religion, Vedic acts were held to be of little use and were disparaged in comparison to bhakti. In addition to the Bhgavatas, there were the gamic cults of the Pan- cartras and the various aivite cults. iva is a full-fledged “monotheistic” god in the vetavatara Upanisad. Several schools of aivism were influential around the turn of the millennium: the Pupata school, the Lkula Pupata school, and the Kplika school. The Pupata school is held to be the earliest of these (33). Upadhyay argues that the Mahbhrata and the Purnas are a record of the intense anxiety experienced by orthodox Brahmanism, as a result of the foreign incursions, the changing socioeconomic environment, and the ideological challenges mounted by the various ramanas.5 These apprehensions, he says, were exorcised through the very gloomy thesis of kaliyuga, ‘the age of distress’ (25). Upadhyay states that the four-yuga conception is a nostalgic hearkening to a peaceable glorious past, describing the advancement of human history as one of increasing lawlessness and degeneration: “Nowhere is the Brhmana psychology so much deranged as in the delineation of the horror of this age” (25). Purnic and epic writings of the kaliyuga betray despondency at the apparent disintegration of orthodox culture, as well as disquiet over Brahmanical responsibility as custodians of the Vedic tradition. The many and vivid descriptions of kaliyuga in the Mahbhrata and Purna rehearse the sense of foreboding generated by the age. It is feared that the varna system will collapse, and all humanity will be of one order. The earth will be full of mlecchas (foreigners), without rites and sacrifices. Brhmanas will be killed and persecuted by dras, and, afflicted with fear, will rove the earth without protectors. There will be great wars. The brhmanas, without power or fortune, will need to depend on dras for their livelihood, and will

©2008 State University of New York Press, Albany 24 Woman as Fire, Woman as Sage have to honor dras. The male population will shrink as a result of war. Vedic study and sacrifice will decline, non-Aryans will follow the religion of the Aryans. The earth will belong to mlecchas, and there will be no more rddhas (obsequial rites). dras will explain the dharma, and brhmanas will follow. There will be the veneration of bones (a clear reference to Bud- dhist stps), the construction of tombs over sacred sacrificial grounds and sacred tanks. People will mix with heretics, non-Vedic texts will be the authority of heretics, and brhmanas will mix with anti-Vedic sects. There will be many sects whose followers will be renouncers (25–29; the notion of kaliyuga is discussed further in Chapter Six). In Upadhyay’s view, the fervid unease of the age fermented into a period of concentrated literary and theological creativity. The Brahmanical tradition evolved various devices to overcome the setbacks suffered by Vedic religion. “The Mahbhrata betrays a conscious attempt on the part of brhmanas to synthesize diverse religious systems” (37). One of the techniques developed, he proposes, is the incorporation and “vedicization” of non-Vedic deities. The Stvata deity Vsudeva-Krsna becomes identified with the Vedic Visnu (39). The Mahbhrata is thought to have been composed during a time when the Brahmanical tradition was reasserting itself through this kind of imaginative theological reconstruction. Upadhyay does not specify this, but implies in other ways that these artful endeavors assume the successful political defense of Brahmanical values made by the un˙ga dynasty (second–third centuries C.E.).6 The Mahbhrata is thought to reflect the renewed sense of confidence experienced by the tradition, when various philosophical methods had been formulated for dealing with the intellectual challenges posed by the erstwhile ramana traditions. It retains in its narrative strain the collective memory of its hoary Vedic past. At the same time, it reflects the psychological turmoil of the immediately preceding centuries, while anticipating the sophisticated theological syntheses to be chiseled and polished in classical Hinduism. The Mahbhrata is therefore viewed as a transitional text, synthesizing the most attractive features of all of its adver- sarial movements. The devotional trends of the Krsnaite and aiva cults are incorporated as the bhakti elements of the text. The ramana worldview, with its doctrines of sam sra, rebirth, karmic retribution, and moksa (final liberation), as well as its stern ethical core, is appropriated as the ultimate interpretation of existence, and paid ideological deference. Meanwhile, the Vedic tradition is retained but increasingly reevaluated. Its sacrificial ethos is interpreted metaphorically, and its most offensive edges (animal sacrifice, for example) are intellectually scrutinized.

Elements of Upadhyay’s somewhat breathless summary will be contro- versial—for example, the trend of viewing Krsna as a euhemerized local chieftain has been criticized by Alf Hiltebeitel (1995), while the alleged pro- motion of Krsna from local Stvata deity to universal God also meets resist- ance (though it is supported by van Buitenen 1973, Brockington 1999, Hopkins 1969, and others). Similarly, scholars will differ on the dates they assign to the composition of the text.7 The broad details of Upadhyay’s overview, are, however, affirmed by other scholars.8 Hence for the purpose of this study, I have used his outline provisionally, as a platform on which to sit- uate and ground the more focused discussion to follow—with the proviso that scholars differ on individual points of this trajectory of development.9 There can be no doubt that the Mahbhrata is a product of these contested political, economic, social, and religious upheavals.10 This brings us to a more focused examination of the religious context of the epic.

Religion in the Mahbhrata

Nineteenth-century European stereotypes characterized India as a land steeped in religion, where the whole spectrum of experience—worldly or “otherworldly”; natural or supernatural; human, subhuman, or superhuman— is subsumed and rationalized in the religious. While this was not considered a virtue in the heyday of logical positivism and rationalist Modern thought, there is good reason for treating the subject of sexuality in the Mahbhrata as a religious phenomenon. All discussions of sex and gender are framed within the theological and metaethical discourses of dharma and adharma, righteousness and unrighteousness, and the study of sexuality in the Mahb- hrata is therefore inalienable from the study of religion. It is necessary at the outset then, to take some account of the religious platform on which discussions of sex are premised. The question of the religion of the Mahbhrata is complex enough to deserve a separate monograph, and there is no dearth of writing on this subject, particularly that focused on the Gt.11 In these texts, however, there is little consensus on the larger religious orientation of the Mahbhrata.Aswe have seen, scholars dispute whether the Mahbhrata was originally a aivite or a Vaisnavite work; they dispute whether Krsna is original to the epic; some contend that the Mahbhrata was not a religious text at all, but originally a heroic ballad; others view it as quintessentially religious. Nor is there any

©2008 State University of New York Press, Albany 26 Woman as Fire, Woman as Sage particular consensus among traditional commentators. am kara interpreted the Gt along Advaitin lines, Rmnuja and Madhva along theist ones, the eleventh-century Abhinavagupta took an Advaitin perspective, as did the major seventeenth-century commentator Nlakantha Dksita. Below, I add my own voice to this cacophonous chorus. While the merits of individual interpretations may be debated, the fact that there are so many, and exhibiting such a disparate range of opinion, demonstrates something more fundamental: that the Mahbhrata is what might cautiously be termed a pluralist text, that engages a variety of religious doctrines and explicitly or tacitly permits them to coexist, without insisting on dogmatic uniformity. The text thus lends itself to multiple interpretations, and this may be telling of the historical period in which it was composed, as well as of the relatively ecumenical spirit of the text itself. Any analysis of the religious ethos of the text therefore must be at least somewhat subjective, emphasizing some currents of discourse and treating others as secondary. Recent scholarship has tended to give weight to the theist strains in the text, as exemplified, for example in the Nryanya portion of the Anusana- parva.12 For various reasons I am disinclined to follow this trend. No doubt all scholars aspire in their work to “let the text speak for itself.” This is, however, a special problem for a text like the Mahbhrata, which is garrulous in the extreme. It expatiates on religion in so many different ways that it’s entirely possible for two scholars to “let the text speak” and arrive at quite different conclusions. I have chosen to take my cue on this subject from those areas of the text that directly confront questions of religion, namely, the moksadharma section of the ntiparva. I believe this is a defensible selection for two reasons. The first is that in this section, the text itself acknowledges the plurality of religious doctrines. It sifts and weighs them, and self-reflexively attempts to articulate them in some systematic synthetic form. The second is that, notwithstanding the apparent discrepancies between the “didactic” and the “narrative,”13 there is considerable congruence to be found between the conclusions reached in these sections, and the assumptions underlying the text as a whole. The philosophical outlook expounded in the moksadharma section reverberates through the entire text. Echoes of it may be found in the philosophy of the Gt, as well as in other segments of the text that address the questions directly. I will therefore focus on the moksadharma as detailing most succinctly the Mahbhrata’s self-consciously and reflectively formulated opinions about religion, with the caveat, however, that the categories developed are not absolute but to be employed heuristically.

In the moksadharma section of the ntiparva, the twelfth and largest volume of the text, the Mahbhrata explicates its own views on the nature, aims, and purpose of religion (dharma).14 The section forms part of a larger education imparted in three phases to the victorious Pndava elder Yud- histhira by the dying grandsire Bhsma. In this third and final section on dharma,Bhsma’s lessons are augmented by numerous anecdotes about sages and deities. Several exalted characters appear in person to tutor Yudhisthira, Vysa and Krsna among them, underscoring the wisdom and maturity of Bhsma’s comments. Broadly conceived, in the moksadharma section, religious activity is said to be of two basic types. These are pravrtti dharma and nivrtti dharma;15 “these are the two paths upon which the Vedas are established” (XII.233.6).16 Pravrtti and nivrtti are offered as the most embracing categories for understanding the diversity of religious thought and practice in classical India. They are not new; pravrtti and nivrtti represent the pitryana (“way of the fathers”) and the devayana (“way of the gods”) respectively, a categorization already found in texts such as the Jaiminya Brhmana, and the Brhadran- yaka and Chndogya Upanisads.17 Taken in sum, pravrtti and nivrtti are a commodious device employed by the writers to claim knowledge of the plurality of religious practices and to assign them relative value. Thus, the variety of extant beliefs and practices are typologized and hierarchalized. The hierarchy itself is of interest, and tells us something about the ultimate religious predilections of the writers. On the other hand, the fact that they sought to retain the multiplicity and to synthesize it, tells us that they found value in divergent forms of religious practice and the ruminations of the moksadharma section are a way to rationalize them. The final product is a powerfully coherent picture of the religious values embraced by the composers of the epic, in which the diversity of religious phenomena is retained, but the value assigned them is reassessed. Thus both orthodoxy and change are accommodated. Orthodoxy is preserved in principle, but its preservation is partly illusory in that the nomenclature of pravrtti/nivrtti necessitates a two-tier system of values, in which the orthodox position is displaced of priority, ultimately relegated to a supportive position rather than the primary one. Let us look at the details. Pravrtti and nivrtti are conceptualized as two types of religion that are fundamentally antithetical to each other. They are, however, sought to be reconciled at nodal points in their theologies. They might heuristically be

©2008 State University of New York Press, Albany 28 Woman as Fire, Woman as Sage analyzed as being distinct from each other on four counts: (1) they attract different types of practitioners, (2) they avow different goals, (3) they practice different ethics, and (4) they utilize different methods of achieving their goals. As we shall see in more detail, pravrtti connotes acts of ritual engagement with the world, while nivrtti implies a turning away from the concerns of the world, a thorough and cultivated disregard for the values on which the world is structured.

Pravrtti Dharma

Pravrtti dharma is an evolute of what the Gt occasionally disdains as “the religion of the Vedas” (BG II.43–45). The word is derived from the suffix pra attached to the root vrt. The combination has a broad semantic range, meaning “to commence, increase, grow, act, prevail, happen.” One meaning is “active life; taking an active part in worldly affairs.”18 In the moksadharma section of the ntiparva, the term pravrtti refers to that level of religion that is practiced by ordinary people, immersed in the ordinary activities of living ordinary lives. It is the level at which the vast majority of humanity functions. Pravrtti dharma is this-worldly and pragmatic, and is characterized by an active immersion in life. This involvement in life is neither arbitrary nor personal, however. It is envisioned as being studied and ritualized, consciously enacted, contained within carefully demarcated constraints of time, space, and multiple hierarchies. If dharma were bipedal, pravrtti dharma would be one sturdy limb. It offers all that one might need to live a productive life in society: a vertical orientation that situates humanity in relation to the cosmos, a lateral orientation that locates one in relation to others in the world, and a somewhat underdeveloped inner anchoring that facilitates a reflective appreciation of the rest. In its vertical inclination, pravrtti dharma offers a highly refined analysis of the relationship of human beings with the cosmos. This is what we know as the sacrificial religion of the Vedas. Pravrtti dharma visualizes this relationship as a reciprocal exchange between human beings and the various divini- ties that regulate the functions of the cosmos. It also prescribes the attitudes that are appropriate for human beings to this relationship—reverence, honor, methodically precise worship. The laborious systems of Vedic sacrifice are based on this analysis. Human beings maintain their commitment to the divine by executing with scrupulous care the rituals of the sacrifice. In return,

©2008 State University of New York Press, Albany Religion in the Mahbhrata 29 the devas, supported by these ritual activities, are obligated to assist humans with their diverse agendas. Pravrtti dharma implies more than just the Vedic tradition, however— and in this sense is not the old Vedic religion at all, but something quite new; pravrtti dharma is the Vedic tradition reconstituted and redefined, so that while it embraces the religious vocabulary of the Vedas and the symbology of the sacrifice, it extends, prolongs, and modifies it. For example, pravrtti dharma extends the precision of Vedic ritual into social terrain to achieve a more refined typology of social relationships than was the case in Vedic literature. Thus in its “lateral” dimension, pravrtti dharma is concerned with assigning each element its proper place and method of living. The correct relationships between human beings and other elements (nature, animals) are suggested. Also implied is the manner in which human beings should conduct themselves in relation to them. Some animals deserve affection, reverence, and protection (cows), while others are considered unclean and loathsome (dogs). In general, humans are privileged over the animal world, but this privilege is not unambiguous, because animals can have powers that supersede those of humans. Nature, in its myriad forms as earth, water, and food, is seen as being organi- cally connected with the human world. Humans are extensions and modifica- tions of the same elemental matter that composes nature; this attitude is an extension of the insight captured in the famous Upanisadic proclamation: “I am food! I am food! I am food! I am the eater of food! I am the eater of food! I am the eater of food!” (Taittirya Upanisad 3.10.6). Relationships among human beings are more specifically itemized at this lateral level, and the norms by which they are to be conducted are ritualized. This is what we recognize as the formula varnramadharma. The Vedic world, of course, was already familiar with the classifications of varna as famously evident in the purusasukta (Rg.10.90), and the Brhmanas developed an analysis of varnadharma. In the pravrtta strands of Mahbhrata religious discourse, these discussions are amplified. The fine details of varnadharma are drawn out, in maneuvers anticipating the taxonomical labors of the Dharmastras. The duties and privileges of the various varnas are elaborated at length, and several sections of the postwar books are devoted to assigning social value to embryonic subclass groups. Class hierarchies, therefore, are a crucial element of pravrttidharma, of increasing conse- quence in determining a person’s duty. (More on this in Chapter Three). Varna represents one axis of social ordering; another is achieved by the device of rama. Whereas the Vedic tradition was fundamentally the

©2008 State University of New York Press, Albany 30 Woman as Fire, Woman as Sage religion of a householder, the concept of rama was designed to acknowl- edge and accommodate divergent lifestyles that were gaining popular sway, in particular the lifestyle of celibate mendicancy.19 In the pravrtta sections of the Mahbhrata, rama is increasingly a point of reference in assessing one’s social obligations. The signification of the word rama, however, is still fluid, connoting sometimes a stage in the larger life cycle of an individual, and sometimes a permanent lifestyle chosen by the individual. To the evolving orthodoxies of varna and rama should be added the less heralded but equally trenchant hierarchies of sex and seniority. In actu- ality, more primary than either varna or rama in determining one’s dharma in a situation is the variable of sex. As we shall see, the dharma of a man is almost always differentiated from the dharma of a woman, in each varna and rama. It is the tacit, but most fundamental ordering principle of pravrtti dharma. Finally, in a classification that often passes unremarked, one’s obligations may also be inferred from one’s position within a familial hierarchy. Classical Hinduism had a systematization of relationships almost as elaborate and refined as that of classical Confucianism; thus, the younger member of any partnership was deemed to have different responsibilities from an elder; a younger brother, for example, had different privileges and responsibilities from his older sibling. In formulations very much reminis- cent of classical Confucian thought, the younger owed the elder unquestion- ing filial obedience and respect. The elder owed the younger guidance, protection, and support. The lateral level of pravrtti dharma thus embraces all aspects of a person’s social relationships, both domestic and public. It contextualizes indi- viduals, situates them relationally on the interlocking matrices of sex, age, occupation, and binary relationship. All of these factors are crucial reference points in determining one’s duty. A universal ethics is decidedly absent in pravrtti dharma. As far as one can determine, there is no Kantian universal person with categorical ethical obligations; while one can find the odd statement implying a universal ethics, a closer examination reveals a hoax. Ethics in pravrtti dharma are almost always sex or class-differentiated. Thus, “universal duties” (dharmn - vatn) are enumerated in ntiparva XII:60.7–8, and are explicitly stated to apply to all classes: “freedom from anger, truthfulness of speech, an agree- able nature, forgiveness, fathering children upon one’s own wives, purity, avoidance of quarrel, sincerity, and maintenance of dependants”20 (XII.60.7–8). The reference to wives, however, immediately betrays the lim-

©2008 State University of New York Press, Albany Religion in the Mahbhrata 31 ited audience addressed; pravrtti ethics are always contingent on the social location of the moral agent. All of the above factors lead to the conclusion that ethics in pravrtti dharma are of necessity situational rather than categorical; there are no deon- tological obligations incumbent on all beings. In the act of ascertaining one’s duty, one must weigh in balance one’s numerous obligations, the “vatn” as well as those of sex, varna, rama, and seniority. Thus one arrives at one’s svadharma, one’s own peculiar and distinctive dharma. The personal, individual dimension is somewhat neglected in pravrtti dharma. Fundamentallly, it is a system of social ethics. To the limited extent that we can speak of individual personal goals in the pravrtta context, we might allude to what the text calls the trivarga, also known as the purusrthas. Later Hinduism codifies these as the “purposes, aims, or goals of a human being,” but in the Mahbhrata, this theology is tentative and evolving. In several passages, the purusrthas are cited more as the hallmarks of a truly cultured and sophisticated man; that is to say, one who is educated, urbane, and worldly-wise, is one who is schooled in the trivarga, the triad of dharma, artha, kma. It is in this sense that we can understand the deer’s admonition to Pndu in diparva. The deer contends that Pndu should not have shot him while he was engaged in the act of mating; “You who understand the pleasures of women, and the truths of the scriptures and dharma and artha; such an unholy act is unbecoming of a god-like person like yourself”21 (I.109.21). The deer’s assertion is that a man of cultivation and refinement would not have committed so barbaric an act as to injure a being in the process of enjoying kma; he would have understood the delicacy of the moment. Artha and kma are pursuits natural to the human condition; tempered with study of scripture and dharma, they should be indulged with refinement, consideration, and taste. In other passages, the purusrthas are ordered according to class. Thus, while one may generalize that dharma is the duty of all people of all varnas, it is especially so of male brhmanas, who are the custodians and interpreters of dharma for the rest of society. Artha is approved for all classes of male householders, but for ksatriyas and vaiyas more than for brhmanas.22 The quest for kma is similarly legitimated for all classes, but a crude and hedo- nistic pursuit of kma is characteristic only of the lowest classes and asuras. The purusrthas in the Mahbhrata are about personal moral and aesthetic refinement, so that one’s base human proclivities are tempered with cultivated restraint. It is to this limited extent that we can speak of a personal

©2008 State University of New York Press, Albany 32 Woman as Fire, Woman as Sage dimension to pravrtti dharma; for the most part, it is outwardly oriented, toward a social and communitarian ethics. A theology of the individual is decidedly underdeveloped. The primary concern of pravrtti dharma is the twice-born male householder, and his interrelationships with all other elements of his universe. Pravrtti dharma elucidates his duties and responsibilities in every sphere of life, and in so doing also sketches out the duties of other groups. As in the Vedic tradition, wives and children are understood not as separate entities in themselves, but as adjuncts who enable and facilitate the religious life of the male householder. Pravrtti dharma prolongs this tendency into classical Hin- duism. The paternalist bent of Vedic religion is taken to its logical extension, so that the lives of women are inextricably entwined with that of their husbands, past, present, or future. An extensive theology is articulated, enjoining the devotion of women to their husbands. These trends coalesce in the evolu- tion of the ideology of the pativrat woman, the woman “avowed to her hus- band/lord.” The pativrat woman is the dominant paradigm for ideal female behavior in pravrtti dharma. In this tri-dimensional way, pravrtti dharma paves the way for the theologizing systemizations of classical Hinduism, and addresses every aspect of lived ordinary life. Its “method” of practice, therefore, is faithful and ritualized adherence to all the regulations and guidelines set in place by the Vedic tradition: participation in the Vedic sacrifice for those to whom it is permitted, in the capacity in which they are permitted to participate; compliance with boundaries in all social relations; heedfulness of all varieties of dharmas in the pursuit of goals appropriate to one’s station. It is preeminently the religion of the householder: “The dharma characteristic of pravrtti is prescribed for householders”23 (XIII.129.16). While embedded in the concept of the ramas is the recognition of lifestyles other than that of the householder, renunciation still remains a distant fourth lifestyle/stage in most pravrtti formulations, and is given little emphasis.24 The twice-born male householder is the locus of the theologizing activities of the text. The spiritual goals of pravrtti dharma are modest, compared with those of nivrtti dharma. As in Vedic religion, optimal religious engagement yields a period of residence in heaven (svargaloka/devaloka). Pravrtti dharma is a little different from Vedic religion, however. Whereas death and heaven, with the supportive ritual activities of one’s descendants represented the end of existence in the Vedic scheme, in pravrtti dharma, the karma-and-rebirth worldview of the Upanisads25 has forged some pathways. Pravrtti dharma, therefore, operates on the understanding that when the merit from one’s

©2008 State University of New York Press, Albany Religion in the Mahbhrata 33 works (karma) is exhausted, one will return again from heaven to live as a creature on earth. One will pick up again the trajectory of life interrupted with one’s death, and continue in a new existence. Implicit in the theorizing of pravrtti dharma is that it is a temporary path, a point of waiting and hold- ing until one is mentally and spiritually ready for the true religious path. Pravrtti is the domain of busy-ness, activity, and ritual worldliness, and is geared toward the ephemeral: temporary goals and temporary rewards. When one tires of its repetitive transience and begins to seek some manner of per- manence, one will turn to the uttamadharma, the “true or ideal religion,” that is, nivrtti dharma.InMahbhrata shorthand, pravrtti dharma is therefore called the religion of acts (karma), and the religion that is “rebirth-oriented” (pravrttih punarvrttih XII.210.4).

Nivrtti Dharma

Nivrtti dharma is envisioned as the structural opposite of pravrtti dharma.It represents an emphatic departure from all of the preoccupations of pravrtti dharma, and is geared radically toward the achievement of personal spiritual ends. The word nivrtti is derived from the suffix ni added to the root vrt. Together, the word connotes disappearance, cessation, abstinence from work, inactivity, resignation, discontinuance of worldly acts or emotions, separation from the world.26 Its idiomatic use in the Mahbhrata suggests renunciation, a decisive rejection of worldly life, its overarching worldview, the various systems and hierarchies that support that worldview and its many social and ritual monuments. It diagnoses this life as fundamentally flawed, a wholly unsatis- factory place of entrapment, and earnestly seeks release from it.27 Nivrtti dharma, therefore, is vitally premised on Upanisadic views of existence. The world (samsra) is seen as a place of suffering and anxiety that are perpetuated by one’s actions (karma, both of a moral and a ritual nature). One’s participation in this realm of pleasurable distraction is endlessly rehearsed through rebirth. The only worthy goal of human striving is to emancipate oneself from the shackles of birth and death (punarjanma), and achieve lasting peace, permanent happiness (moksa). In defiance and repudiation of all social conven- tion, nivrtti directs itself to the goal of moksa, which also represents freedom from the cyclical enclosures of birth and death. Nivrtti dharma, therefore, is frequently used as a synonym for moksadharma, “the religion of freedom.” While pravrtti dharma is the religion of the ordinary—practiced by ordinary folk in society, using the familiar method of sacrificial religion,

©2008 State University of New York Press, Albany 34 Woman as Fire, Woman as Sage aimed at the modest goal of worldly prosperity, nivrtti dharma is by defini- tion the religion of the extraordinary, requiring exceptional effort. “The wise say that birth, death, and other afflictions rule over and are beyond [the control] of human beings”28 (XII.306.106). If one hopes to control one’s life, therefore, instead of being controlled by it, one must engage in uncommonly arduous work. In contrast to the communal leanings of pravrtti dharma, the goals of nivrtti dharma are ambitious and squarely soteriological; it aims for nothing short of absolute liberation from the cycle of deaths and rebirths intu- ited in the philosophy of the Upanisads. It therefore refers to itself as “the highest path” (nivrttih param gatih XII.210.4). Its method of practice is cor- respondingly extreme and rigorous, and intended only for the exceptionally focused, hardy few. Moksa is unequivocally articulated as the final goal of nivrtti dharma, but the Mahbhrata’s views of the content of moksa are still under construction. Is it achievable while still living? Where does one’s body go when one achieves moksa? Should it be visualized as a physical space, or as a mental or emotional realm?29 Who has the adhikra to moksa? What are the duties of the renouncer, or should he or she have any? These details have not been worked out in the text, although it anticipates some of the directions in which classical Hinduism evolved. It would seem that the composers of the text were open to the proposi- tion that moksa may be achieved in a variety of ways. These are most famously indicated in the Gt, whose theology of the “three paths” came ultimately to represent the core of Hinduism. Although the Gt never for- mally speaks of three paths, it discusses the possibility of liberating oneself through the modes of jñna (contemplation of one’s true identity), of karma (the path of a peculiar type of disciplined action), and ultimately of bhakti (earnest devotion to God, in the Gt conceptualized as Krsna, elsewhere accommodating iva). It would seem that trodden with earnestness, any and all of these pursuits might bring one to the desired destination of moksa.In the moksadharma section, the path most privileged is that of jñna,of immersing oneself in the contemplation of one’s true identity as the Self (tman/purusa). While later Hinduism expands on the techniques of bhakti and karmayoga, in the Mahbhrata I would argue the archetype of the nivrtti practitioner is the ascetic, the tapasvin characterized by acts of extreme asceticism, involving the deprivation, chastisement, and ultimate mastery over the body. Through the denial of all bodily comforts, through dire and extreme acts of self-torture, the nivrtti practitioner symbolizes his or her understand-

©2008 State University of New York Press, Albany Religion in the Mahbhrata 35 ing of the temporality of the body and of the enchantments of sam sra, and rejects them, often torturing them out of existence. The activities of tapasvins generate tapas, a burning, dangerous fund of heat that is both literal and metaphorical. It can destroy those who transgress them, or alternatively it can be used to scorch the seeds of attachment to the world30 (XII.204.16). Through acts of asceticism, therefore, tapasvins combat the attractions of the world, accruing a psycho-spiritual power that paradoxically rivals and sur- passes the powers of the temporal world. According to many passages in the moksadharma section, success in nivrtti engagements is crucially linked to the extent to which one identifies oneself with other beings, and cares for their suffering. “When one sees all beings in oneself and oneself in all beings, then one has realized the individual soul that is Brahman”31 (XII.231.21). The ideal person is “one who [sees the identity] of all beings with himself, and the welfare of all beings [with his own]”32 (XII.321.23). Krsna echoes this philosophy to Arjuna in the Gt, “Through [true knowledge] you will see all creatures without exception within yourself and then within me”33 (BG.IV.35). The goal, then, is wisdom. This is particularly so in the moksadharma section of the ntiparva, and is evident in statements such as “Man has only one enemy, o king, and no second. This enemy is known as ignorance. Impelled by it, one is led to per- form terrible and pitiless acts”34 (XII.286.28). The natural logical corollary of intuiting deeply one’s identity with other beings is treating beings with gentleness and compassion. The ethics professed by nivrtti dharma therefore are demanding. At once simpler and sterner than those of pravrtti dharma, the values of rigorous self-discipline take precedence over the goals of social harmony. Nivrtti dharma defines dharma as “that which strives for the benefit of creatures; dharma is so called because it is wedded to ahims”35 (XII.110.10). It removes dharma from the obfusca- tions of social relationships and renders it a simple dictum: “People know that the eternal dharma is that which is ancient, which is friendliness, and [which works for] the welfare of all”36 (XII.254.5). Dharma is not about calibrating one’s social obligations, weighing one’s social position in relation to others. Dharma enjoins care of all beings, irrespective of social standing or even species: “Dharma is so called because it supports [all creatures]. Creatures are protected by dharma. Because it is inalienable from its support [of beings], it is called dharma” (XII.110.11).37 A person devoted to nivrtti ethics, therefore, is identified by his or her solicitude and kindness towards others. Ideal nivrtti adherents are described by their calmness, their patience, their perfect balance of mind. Pndu captures the archetype in a passage from

©2008 State University of New York Press, Albany 36 Woman as Fire, Woman as Sage the diparva, where he determines briefly to adopt nivrtti practices. “If one man chops my arm off, and another anoints it with sandalpaste, I shall wish neither good upon one, nor ill upon the other. I shall do nothing out of a will to live, or a will to die; and neither rejoice at life nor hate death”38 (I.110.14–15). Yudhisthira hankers after this ideal on the various occasions when he tries to opt out of pravrtti dharma after the war. The nivrtti sage is described in the ntiparva: “He is one into whom words enter like fright- ened elephants into a well and never come out. He hears no evil of others. He remembers no evil. When dispraised, he is silent” (tsnmst nindym XII.237.10). The same passage continues, “He can make a spot teeming with people seem perfectly still39 (XII.237.11) . . . [Such a person] is never glad when honoured, never angry when insulted, assures all creatures of his compassion”40 (XII.237.14). One who practises nivrtti is one “whose life is the practice of dharma (jvitam yasya dharmrtham XII.237.23), who feels dis- tressed at causing grief to others, and who embraces noninjurious conduct (ahim s pratipadyate XII.237.19). Such a person is “the refuge of all creatures”41 (aranah sarvabhtnm XII.237.20). His cardinal ethic is that of nonharmfulness, of avoiding injury to other beings. As one nivrtti practitioner challenges a pravrtti one: “If there is any ethic evident that is superior to ahims, that is rooted in righteousness instead of the gamas or stras,if you see it, do explain it”42 (XII.260.19). Contrasted with pravrtti, nivrtti ethics may therefore be characterized as personal, self-cultivational, and mystical. While pravrtti values are oriented to the social and pragmatic, nivrtti ethics typically concern themselves with the care of other beings, with truthfulness, charity, patience, self- restraint, and compassion. At least in theory, nivrtti dharma therefore refuses to recognize social differences as in any way authoritative. “If these [high qualities] are evident in a dra, but are not found in a brhmana, then the dra is not a dra, and the brhmana is not a brhmana”43 (XII.182.8). While limited to the exceptionally gifted few, nivrtti dharma is in this sense paradoxically more egalitarian than pravrtti dharma. “My scale” says Tulandhara, one nivrtti adherent, to his adversary Jajali, “is evenly balanced for all creatures”44 (XII.254.12). “A wise man is one who looks equally upon a brhmana who has disciples and wisdom, a cow, an elephant, a dog and a dog-eater”45 (XII.231.19). Nivrtti dharma insists that true worth is to be measured by conduct, not by birth: “The birth of great souls, who have puri- fied themselves is through austerities. [Such people] are unaffected by low birth. Those learned in the Vedas hold a virtuous dra to be equal to a brh-

©2008 State University of New York Press, Albany Religion in the Mahbhrata 37 mana. I myself look upon such a one as Visnu, who pervades and supports the whole universe”46 (XII.285.28). Liberation (moksa) is an achievement of one’s mental rectitude, one’s personal effort, and is divorced from consideration of one’s social station. It is achievable by all who undertake the proper yoga, or means: “Whether a person is of low caste or a woman who is attached to dharma, both, by following this path [of yoga] may achieve the highest end”47 (XII.232.32). Ignorance is the only obstacle to liberation. To obliterate ignorance, one should with reverence accept instruction from whomever has the wisdom: “Acquiring knowledge from a brhmana or ksa- triya or vaiya or even a dra of low birth imparted graciously, one should accept it with confidence . . . All varnas are brhmanas. All are born of Brah- man, and all constantly utter Brahman. With the knowledge of Brahman,of truth and of the stras, I say this whole universe is pervaded by Brahman”48 (XII.306.85–86). Nivrtti dharma is therefore pursued by the uncommonly tenacious and spiritually rugged few who, the ideal holds, may come from any walk of society. Its goal is radical and immoderate. Its primary method of accomplish- ment is ascetic renunciation of the world. It is accompanied by a stringent code of ethics whose most compelling injunction is that of nonharmfulness to other beings (ahims). The primary orientation of nivrtti dharma, therefore, is vertical, toward moksa, toward release from the cycles of death and rebirth. Whereas pravrtti dharma is geared toward a more harmonious existence within the cyclic world (samsra), nivrtti dharma aims to transcend the limi- tations of samsra forever, and entails a renunciation of interest in the values of pravrtti. Nivrtti dharma may also be understood as being tri-dimensional. The difference is that its other dimensions are conceived more as aids or adjuncts to the primary spiritual pursuit than as ends in themselves. Thus, in its personal dimension, nivrtti dharma is deeply and intensely introspective, and calls for a psychological transformation in the individual. It calls on a person to reorient his or her physical, mental, and emotional patterns toward the achievement of equanimity. While the practice of nivrtti dharma must begin with this earnest internal transformation, however, the underlying soteriological objective is paramount; it is the crucial inspiration for one’s efforts. Simi- larly, the lateral dimension of nivrtti dharma also emerges out of its more fundamental spiritual striving: care of other beings is at once the prerequisite and the outcome of one’s nivrtti directedness. In order to achieve true equanimity, one must learn to conduct oneself in nonharmful ways. Conversely, in

©2008 State University of New York Press, Albany 38 Woman as Fire, Woman as Sage the seeking after the highest end, one is of necessity altered into a more sym- pathetic human being, full of compassion and generosity for the suffering of others.49

Reconciling Domestic and Ascetic Ideals

These are the two basic impulses of religion described by the Mahbhrata. In the ntiparva, the two are contrasted. Scholars of Hinduism have often talked about the tension at the heart of Hinduism, the tension between the world-denying and the world-affirming elements of the tradition.50 Some have argued that this tension was never resolved.51 The basic ambiguity in attitudes to “the world,” physically, socially, and theologically construed, is as evident in the Mahbhrata as in other strands of Hindu literature. In the moksadharma section of the text, however, the superiority of the nivrtti path over pravrtti is strenuously asserted, both in terms of its goals and in terms of its ethics. “In this, all the three worlds, with their animate and inanimate elements are established. Nivrtti dharma [leads to] the unmanifest eternal Brahman . . . Pravrtti is [the path of] rebirth. Nivrtti is the highest end”52 (XII.210.3–4). Pravrtti is explicitly connected with worldly and temporal concerns, while nivrtti is associated with the highest objectives of humanity. In parallel constructions encountered repeatedly in the section, nivrtti dharma is elevated above pravrtti dharma in value. As Bhsma summarizes, for example: “The ascetic who discriminates between good and evil, who is always intent upon achieving the highest knowledge, who observes nivrtti dharma, achieves that high end”53 (XII.210.5). The nivrtti critique of pravrtti follows various avenues. The intelli- gence of pravrtti followers, immersed in their pretensions of culture and ritual observance, is held to be inferior. For example, one section, comparing the types of people engaged in both activities, concludes: “Of the two, the intelligent tread the higher path [of nivrtti]”54 (XII.205.3). The ritual supports of pravrtti dharma are also questioned. The devas to whom worship is addressed in sacrificial culture are dispensed with as being of little use, and as sharing the fortunes of all other beings; they must return from age to age to enjoy the fruits of their pravrtti orientation, hence are not much different from human beings55 (XII.327.43–60). They are said to have departed from the nivrtti path because it was too difficult to practice, and to have become enjoyers of sacrificial libations for their own gratification (XII.327.7). The sacrificial world and its theology of prosperity and progeny are held in con-

©2008 State University of New York Press, Albany Religion in the Mahbhrata 39 tempt: Medhavin says, “How can one like me worship with animal sacrifices involving cruelty? . . . I am born of Brahman through Brahman. I am established in the Self, though I am childless. In the Self alone shall I be. I do not require a son to rescue me”56 (XII.169.31, 34). Vysa, reputed author of the Great Epic, reinforces these judgments in his instruction to his son uka. Having discussed the two paths of pravrtti and nivrtti, the one characterized by Vedic acts, and the other by knowledge, he says: “By acts, a being is bound. By knowledge, however, he is freed. For this reason, yogs who see the other shore never engage in acts”57 (XII.233.7). The renunciation of (ritual) acts, the very hallmark of nivrtti dharma, is stated to be the highest penance (tapa uttamam XII.214.4). The unrivalled excellence of nivrtti is thus repeatedly affirmed in the moksadharma section. Yet, the activities associated with pravrtti religion are not discarded altogether. They are recast instead as lower-order values. This process is tackled with the help of myth. The origins of both types of religion are located in a myth that we find in the ntiparva. In this myth, the great ascetic sage deity Nryana calls together the seven rsis, and asks them to produce an authoritative treatise on the two types of religion, nivrtti and pravrtti (XII.322.26ff.). Nryana then allocates each to different beings in the universe. He himself remains avowed to nivrtti, thus reinforcing it as the religion of the enlightened, but he makes the deities, including Brahm, share in the sacrifice, which is the very essence of pravrtti. The divergent ideals of the two traditions are thus sought to be reconciled in this way. The famous saptrsi (seven sages, also called here the citraikhandins) of Vedic lore are cast as the progenitors of the religion of pravrtti. A parallel seven rsis are said to have been created for nivrtti. These are: Sana, Sanatsujta, Sanaka, Sanan- dana, Sanatkumra, Kapila, and Santana (XII.327.64). These rsis are envis- aged as eternal brahmacrins, who have never been involved in the tumultuous confusion of the world. They appear periodically to offer didactic support to those in need.58 The above myth accommodates pravrtti within nivrtti by proposing that different creatures are created for different ends—some for pravrtti, some for nivrtti. While there is no doubt as to the precedence of nivrtti, the existence of pravrtti may be tolerated, and in some instances, may be accepted as being necessary for some people, who are spiritually less evolved. This allows for a hierarchalization of values, in which the values of nivrtti supersede those of pravrtti. Pravrtti is recognized, but cast as a pedestrian householder religion. Nivrtti in the same stroke is hailed as the acme of religious understanding. The moksadharma continues its intimations that “Acts cleanse the body.

Wisdom, however, is the highest end”59 (XII.262.36); “He who surrenders himself to penance [nivrtti] for a long time avoids birth and death”60 (XII.307.7). Nivrtti is paid unambiguous ideological deference. It alone tar- gets the critical malaise of existence, and it alone treats it. In later Hindu tradition, the thesis of two religions is regroomed so that pravrtti and nivrtti no longer represent two alternatives for religious practice, as proposed earlier, but two levels of rehearsal of the same basic dharma. This tendency is visible even in the above-quoted passages of the Mahb- hrata. Later tradition refines and institutionalizes this in its elaboration of the rama system. An ordinary man may thus immerse himself in pravrtti engagements until the fourth rama, samnysa, now interpreted as a consec- utive stage of life. After he has lived a rich and productive domestic life, contributing to society, in samnysa a man may soak himself in nivrtti practices to the fullest extent that he desires. The samnysa rama thus works as one of the points of interlude between the two traditions.61 In the moksadharma section of the Mahbhrata, however, these niceties are still in the process of refinement, and pravrtti and nivrtti are understood as two options of religion, albeit not of equal spiritual worth.62

Historical Antecedents

The sharp philosophical differences between the two “religions” may be better understood by examining their different historical antecedents. As suggested, pravrtti dharma is a direct descendant of the rewards-oriented sacrificial religion practiced by the Vedic Aryans.63 The religion of the ancient Vedas was primarily this-worldly, aimed at gaining health, material prosperity, and success. It aimed for the acquisition of heaven—a space where one could enjoy all of the pleasures of material existence, without encountering any of the difficulties. At its higher levels, it was based on an intuition that there was an intrinsic and natural harmony to the universe (rta). Vedic religion was geared at cherishing and supporting this harmony through scrupu- lously correct behaviour in every arena of life—ritual, social, and personal. Nivrtti dharma, on the other hand, is inspired by the varieties of ramana and yogic traditions that had been operating for centuries on the fringes of the Aryan madhyadea, “heartland.” These traditions are thought to go as far back in their practices as Indus Valley religion. They had always been critical of the ritualistic and exclusionary aspects of Vedic sacrificial religion. In particular, the use of animals in Vedic sacrifice invited repeated and sharp criti-